Questioninggeller
Illuminator
- Joined
- May 11, 2002
- Messages
- 3,048
Free crack pipes!
- Thread starter Questioninggeller
- Start date
-
- Tags
- crack
A flea landed on the rim of my glass of sherry. I nearly flicked the little monster to kill it, as I was finished drinking for the night, but I paused to see if it would fall into the glass as it crept toward the slippery edge. I took savage delight in the possibility, and so I waited in anticipation of seeing the bug, drunk on fumes and hoping for death, fall to its doom. Much to my surprise and some annoyance, it instead took flight into the depths my livingroom. I should have flicked the bastard while I had the chance.
Free crack pipes? One could offer a friendly light, and flick away. Or one could wait for them to fall of their own misfortune. On rare occasions, they may go free on their own.
I however, will always be here relaxing in my Jefferson chair, nursing a very expensive sh!t-brown sherry to ease my worldly concerns.
Free crack pipes? One could offer a friendly light, and flick away. Or one could wait for them to fall of their own misfortune. On rare occasions, they may go free on their own.
I however, will always be here relaxing in my Jefferson chair, nursing a very expensive sh!t-brown sherry to ease my worldly concerns.
Kilted_Canuck
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2002
- Messages
- 1,376
Hmmm, I don't like this one as much as Vancouver's Heroin houses which provided clean needles for the destitute addicts.
They're going to do it anyway, this isn't encouragement so much as making sure that they're....well safer when they do coke.
Our socialized healthcare prefers handling patients with either addictions OR transmitted diseases, not both.
They're going to do it anyway, this isn't encouragement so much as making sure that they're....well safer when they do coke.
Our socialized healthcare prefers handling patients with either addictions OR transmitted diseases, not both.
Seriously though...
Crack addicts are going to score and use, regardless of the law, regardless of hygeine, regardless of morals. Making it unlawful just won't stop it. But this is old news.
So, until the miracle cure comes along or they decide to make it social policy to shoot crack addicts on sight, legal harm minimisation would seem to be at least a bit helpful. It's fairly cheap, and at least one aspect of the problem is being dealt with (hygeine). A cure for the total problem it most definitely is not, nor is it being cited as one.
Crack addicts are going to score and use, regardless of the law, regardless of hygeine, regardless of morals. Making it unlawful just won't stop it. But this is old news.
So, until the miracle cure comes along or they decide to make it social policy to shoot crack addicts on sight, legal harm minimisation would seem to be at least a bit helpful. It's fairly cheap, and at least one aspect of the problem is being dealt with (hygeine). A cure for the total problem it most definitely is not, nor is it being cited as one.
Almost as much as the nearly infinite capacity for the human race to create ever more imaginitive ways to kill each other, the seemingly limitless ways people will rationalize appeasement amazes me.
Forced detox is the only policy that makes sense. Give 'em counseling if it helps. Fail three times and spend a few years cooling your heels in prison. After all, you can involuntarily commit the mentally ill for their own protection; a crack addict is at least as big a danger to himself and others as a schizo is.
I've seen what appeasement - what a psychologist would call enabling - will do to someone with a monkey on his back. There's a few more gravestones on my annual itinerary because of nonsense like this.
Forced detox is the only policy that makes sense. Give 'em counseling if it helps. Fail three times and spend a few years cooling your heels in prison. After all, you can involuntarily commit the mentally ill for their own protection; a crack addict is at least as big a danger to himself and others as a schizo is.
I've seen what appeasement - what a psychologist would call enabling - will do to someone with a monkey on his back. There's a few more gravestones on my annual itinerary because of nonsense like this.
Badger
Member of the Peanut Gallery
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2002
- Messages
- 3,435
This bothers me, because they're wasting health care dollars on this program, along with "clean needle" programs.
Yes, I said WASTING. These addicts are on the fast track to dead. Facilitating their self distruction through the use of tax dollars is wrong, and a waste of money that could be better used elsewhere and in other programs.
Yes, I said WASTING. These addicts are on the fast track to dead. Facilitating their self distruction through the use of tax dollars is wrong, and a waste of money that could be better used elsewhere and in other programs.
So you would rather they shot up with filthy gear and infected themselves, and then became an ADDED and PERSISTENT burden on the public healthcare system that is obliged to care for them under those circumstances? And an added infection problem for the health-providers and other people around them? The addiction is not enough, life-threatening infections are required too?Badger said:
In purely money terms alone, free needles and clean gear is by far the cheapest way to alleviate one of the major problems that injected addicts create, i.e. ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊-rat personal infection control affecting everyone they meet. When they are wanting, they won't be thinking of how clean the needle is, so better to stop the problem before it becomes a problem, rather than trying to fix it after.
But I do agree - clean gear is NOT addressing the main issue, and yes, these people ARE on a downward spiral. It isn't pretty. So intervention, or rehab, or gaol, or whatever, DOES need to be examined seriously - I'm all for that. But meanwhile, we don't have to treat these people as though they are subhuman dirt-balls by denying them basic infection protection.
An addict running a galloping fever of 101 from an infecrtion is less likely to try to hold me up and grab my wallet to support his habit than one who's hale and healthy.Zep said:
If you make bad career choices, including trying hard drugs, you should suffer bad consequences. Forcing me to subsidize the cost of your bad choices means I bear the costs, and you suffer no consequences.
If there are no bad consequences to hard drug use, then why shouldn't we all become crack addicts?
Not being put in the same hospital emergency room as one of these guys who are riddled with HIV/AIDS or hepatitis, and are off their face speeding on crack and being paranoidly dangerous. Not having to pay extra insurance for protecting/curing doctors, patients and other people who get infected by these addicts.BPSCG said:
It's also a method of being able to find addicts and track them, either for intervention or for police purposes. Of course, the practicality of the situation is that it will always only be partially effective at either of these goals. But it's better than the alternative...
Point of interest: There has been a long term trial of a legal "shooting gallery" here in one of Sydney's seedier districts. Lots of controversy and questions still surround it's operation (e.g. is it a druggy "honey-pot"?), but it has significantly reduced health risks for the addicts - they get counselling, clean needles, known potency drugs, and any OD's are treated immediately by trained staff. Most importantly, it is an improvement on having young kids being helped to shoot up in back alleys using dirty gear, a situation that appalled Sydney a few years ago.
Maintained at no cost to the taxpayers, I'm sure.Zep said:
...at no cost to the taxpayers...
...at no cost to the taxpayers...
...at no cost to the taxpayers...
...at no cost to the taxpayers...
...who are volunteers, of course, so there's no cost to the taxpayers.
But having healthy junkies saves us all money, don't you know...
The Kings Cross shooting gallery is maintained at minimal cost to the taxpayers, and is staffed by a handful of trained people. It's certainly far cheaper for the taxpayer and more effective than employing more publicly funded doctors and ambulances and police to scrape the druggies up each night and lock them in a filthy cell to "dry out" only to have them bust into houses the next day (i.e. personal losses, insurance costs) to finance their habit and do it all again the next night.
But it's not without criticism, of course. Sample references below.
http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Crime+in+Sydney
http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/eletters/327/7407/122-a
http://aca.ninemsn.com.au/stories/200.asp
http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/030602_s3.htm
http://www.members.optusnet.com.au/drugfree/injectingroom.html
http://www.wesleymission.org.au/releases/October03/031022.asp
http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/Pr...ca256d11000bd3aaca2569b900132acb?OpenDocument
But it's not without criticism, of course. Sample references below.
http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Crime+in+Sydney
http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/eletters/327/7407/122-a
http://aca.ninemsn.com.au/stories/200.asp
http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/030602_s3.htm
http://www.members.optusnet.com.au/drugfree/injectingroom.html
http://www.wesleymission.org.au/releases/October03/031022.asp
http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/Pr...ca256d11000bd3aaca2569b900132acb?OpenDocument
As the brother of someone who was an IV drug abuser who contracted AIDS from sharing needles and died a horrible death, I am undecided on the issue of providing free needles or crack pipes or what-have-you.
I am undecided because I am not sure how motivated a hardcore drug addict would be to regularly get a fresh supply of needles.
Unless the city had a delivery service and kept a tickler file of times and places of addicts who should be coming on a need for a fresh supply (since the addict isn't going to reliably keep a schedule), then I don't see how effective such a program could be. And I can imagine the outcry of actually delivering needles to addicts.
I've done a cursory search on the internet and can't find any studies that have been done to see if after all this time, these free needles programs have done any good.
I am undecided because I am not sure how motivated a hardcore drug addict would be to regularly get a fresh supply of needles.
Unless the city had a delivery service and kept a tickler file of times and places of addicts who should be coming on a need for a fresh supply (since the addict isn't going to reliably keep a schedule), then I don't see how effective such a program could be. And I can imagine the outcry of actually delivering needles to addicts.
I've done a cursory search on the internet and can't find any studies that have been done to see if after all this time, these free needles programs have done any good.